Does a judge or a district attorney have the authority to "seal" an indictment, and if so, is that authority based on statute or some inherent authority? The only thing I could find that is close is in Art. 20.22 about delaying the entering the indictment in the minutes of the court until the defendant is in custody or under bond. I have had several representatives of the local media asking me about this in regards to an incident in a neighboring county. Any insight/info would be greatly appreciated.

The statute you located is the only reference in the code that suggests a sealed indictment is available under the law. In the past, my district clerk would title the file "anonymous" indictment. There are many technical problems with this approach, because no one seems to know what to do with it.

We have found that it results in an invisible file and warrant that doesn't get handled properly by anyone. So, if we want to keep it secret, we do a complaint and warrant, put the warrant in TCIC, and then the complaint is not a public record until the defendant is arrested.

Some counties, however, do not keep open warrant information confidential. So, it is not always a perfect solution.

On a fairly regular basis, a local law enforcement agency will ask us to take a case straight to grand jury rather than initially securing an arrest warrant. It's not a problem except when the suspect is a "high profile" person. It is my policy (and, in my opinion, a reasonable interpretation of the law) not to release any details, identity or otherwise, re non-arrest indicted cases until the defendant is arrested. The local press folks understand and it works well except when my local county law enforcement official tells the local press everything "off the record" and "suggests" that they call me. Then I get inundated with press calls and I don't feel I'm at liberty to discuss anything about pre-arrest indictments that the press folks are already aware of. I'm ready to have a prayer meeting with my local county law enforcement official and I'm wondering where I really stand. At what point do pre-arrest indictments become available for public discussion? Can I legally tell my local law enforcement official to keep quiet until the defendant is arrested? Is my local law enforcement oficial violating any law by "spilling the beans" prior to an arrest? How do you folks handle this type of matter?

I think you can require direct indictment cases to be "Anonymous" until arrest. It is a tricky bit of work because, as you suggest, other departments are involved. Perhaps a memo, distributed to the clerk's office, sheriff and other agencies would do the trick.

If it a local high-profile person, why not have the sheriff call and tell them to report to the jail with a bondsman? Or arrest them right away. Either one could be done the same day the indictment is handed down.

You make a good point, Ken, but we hand our indictments to the clerk when we finish up grand jury and that's often past 5 or 6 in the evening. The Clerk doesn't process the indictments and get the paperwork ready to be sent to the Sheriff until the next day, generally no sooner than noon. Meanwhile, I'm getting press calls during the night of the grand jury meeting and the next day before the defendant is notified and comes in... as a result of talk by the investigating agency head about the indictment. Therein lies the problem...

We don't do anonymous indictments, because we have found the process to be too difficult and leaky, as you describe. So, when we have a direct indictment case that we think will be indicted and need an immediate arrest, we do a complaint and get a warrant.

What is the purpose of 20.22? Does it somehow facilitate the arrest of a fugitive? Does the prosecutor or the sheriff have responsibility to ascertain and notify the clerk that the indictment should not be fully "entered on the minutes"? We do not always know for sure whether the defendant has been previously placed in custody for the offense. And just what is entry on the minutes? Does that mean the case has not reached the court's docket? The "minutes" seem to be a fairly antiquated and nebulous concept to me. I know clerks who effectively "seal" these indictments from public view and do not pass along any information about them, but the statute does not speak to that either. Is that practice required? I presume the federal courts have specific statutes dealing with "sealed indictments". Is the issue merely that we do not want the accused to know what he has been charged with or any details of the allegations until he is arrested? Frankly, it seems more logical to me to think that someone might be more likely to turn himself in once he knows he has been formally charged and will need to appear in court and what for.

Or maybe there is just the idea your neighbor should not know about it until you have a chance to be notified? Of course, you probably already know what to expect.

[This message was edited by Martin Peterson on 06-14-07 at .]